Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Saigo Shiro, born 1866. In 1882 he joined the Kodokan (sixteen years old). He was adopted by Hoshina Chikanori, if Ellis Amdur is correct*, in 1884 (18 years old).

At that time Chikanori was living in Nikkō Tōshō-gū -Togichi prefecture- about 140 km north of Tokyo. This means serious commuting from his adoptive father residence to Tokyo for Judo training and back home for aiki in 19th century Japan.

Thanks for the clarification, Demetrio. Do you know where Shiro was living before his judo training? Also, as shown by Sagawa, Ueshiba, Kodo, etc, aiki can be trained from a distance with irregular hands on time with a teacher. Sort of hard to determine anything one way or the other.

Tanomo knew how to read and write using Chinese characters. He had no personal need to write in katakana, except perhaps as furigana (smaller kana alongside Chinese characters in a text) to indicate the mixed reading of the compound

If we start from the documented premise that the reading is not a straight Chinese reading, but a strange mixed reading, the argument for the katakana being a sign that Tanomo was taught by a Chinese teacher is, well, strangely mixed.

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but I would have to suggest that this isn't evidence that is going to settle the question, or even point dimly toward a settlement.

Best,

FL

Hi Fred,

The question then becomes, why did Sagawa's father write aiki in katakana and not kanji? I don't have the original japanese version of the text and all I have is the interview to go by, so I'm sort of questioning things from afar.

Okay, okay . . . he wrote in kana in an attempt to prevent the possibility that Takeda's Korean house boy might read the text (It was rumored that some Koreans were literate.) and use the privileged information to assert a claim that he (As far fetched as it sounds.) actually observed, and even learned the Great Eastern Art. Worse still, if Tanomo wrote the characters in Chinese (Some Koreans could read Chinese since they had the misfortune of living nearer to the Chinese than they did to the land of the Kami), but of course they needed to be trained to read Chinese in the proper Japanese manner.), the house boy in question might use the same characters to, eventually, name his variant art, only pronouncing it (As outrageous as it may sound.) in his NON-Japanese Tongue. Oh the shame, the Great Eastern Art pretending to be practiced by a non-Great Eastern people and naming in the manner of some upstart offshoot, it boggles the mind . . .better to write in kana and prevent the whole problem from the outset!

He was a Shinto Priest right? Better to not pollute pure Japanese arts with foreign influences. Stick to good ol home grown kana, the stuff of Kotodama!! Oh, and repel the barbarians and up with the Shogunate. (He was an Aizu Shinto Priest after all!)

Thanks for the reply. If I'm getting #2 right, then Takeda, Sagawa's father, etc who were writing aiki using katakana could just have been drawing attention to that word. Which does make a lot of sense because aiki was the secret principle.

As for #1, if it was used extensively, that's a reason all in itself.

Mark

Quote:

Peter A Goldsbury wrote:

Hello Mark,

First of all, the question of katakana.
(1) Katakana was used extensively, even as late as the time when Morihei Ueshiba was writing the explanations of Budo in 1938. Nowadays, hiragana is used as okurigana (the parts of Japanese that show the grammar; usually the endings of words), but Morihei Ueshiba wrote okurigana in katakana and if you look at the illustration on p.58 of Stan Pranin's Daito-ryu interviews, you will see that the okurigana were written in katakana.
(2) Secondly, in Takemusu Aiki, Morihei Ueshiba occasionally writes words in katakana for which there are already acceptable Chinese characters and in which they are usually written (in the same book). For example, on pp.77-78, several times he writes 高天原: high plain heaven: taka-ama-hara (all kun readings) as タカアマハラ. Why? Because he wants to draw attention to the individual syllables as a basis for his kotodama theories. But he uses katakana, not hiragana.

As for aiki, here is a quotation from pp. 311-313 of Fumiaki Shishida's book on budo education. The whole section is worth quoting.

Well it was a 'secret principle', but I think you need to hold your judgment until you have read Shishida's comments about aiki.

I am trying to complete TIE 19 by the end of this month and this is why I have not produced a translation of Shishida's comments.

Best wishes,

PAG

Peter,

In a choice between me and TIE 19, I'd choose TIE 19 all the time.

We know that the actual word, "aiki" was in use in Japan's history. I believe even as far back as the Edo period? However, that's part of my point. If Tanomo learned the concepts and principles of internal skills from a Chinese source but it wasn't called "aiki" by the Chinese, then perhaps Tanomo used that word, "aiki" to describe the internal skills. Maybe he borrowed the Japanese word because it was close (equal to? I don't know) to the Chinese principles that he had learned but wrote it in katakana to differentiate or bring attention to it?

Ellis covered a lot of areas where Takeda learned his Japanese martial skills. Yet where does everyone say Takeda learned aiki? Tanomo. Why is Sagawa's father writing aiki in katakana and not kanji or hiragana? Why is it that Shiro Saigo made such a showing that it was reported as being different and when we look back, we find the link to Tanomo? Why is it that both Takeda and Ueshiba needed to be talked into using "aiki" in Takeda's Daito ryu jujutsu? Neither were keen, at first, to use aiki in the name. Why would someone want to put the actual "secret" out in full view of the public? Of course, we know that they eventually did and it didn't really matter. Hidden in plain sight, as Ellis says.

Ueshiba is, IMO, an anomoly. Something to be looked at as the exception. He completely muddied the water with his spiritual ideology that you can't use him as a source for tracing the history of "aiki" (just the history, not what it was or how to use it). And, IMO, those who trained under him are not exactly good reference material for the history of aiki either. Shishida's words not included as I haven't read them yet.

But, as you noted, katakana was in use extensively, so that explains the katakana usage. Or it could have been just to showcase the word. So, please, don't let me take time away from TIE 19.

The Concept of Aiki
The term "aiki budo" is distinguished from other budo by the concept of "aiki". The word "aiki" can be seen in Edo period martial arts texts, for example Kito-ryu Jujutsu's "Touka Mondou" (Lamplight Dialogue) of 1764. There, "aiki" (相気) is used to refer to the difficult state of engaging in attack and defense when in the same kisetsu* as the opponent. The use of "aiki" (合気) can be found in many martial arts writings of the 1800s, with the same meaning as in the Touka Mondou.** The shift away from this meaning began with the 1892 "Budo Hiketsu Aiki no Jutsu" (The Secret Budo Techniques of Aiki); here "aiki" is an inner teaching of budo, with the meaning of "being one step ahead of the enemy" (敵より一歩先んずる). Here, "techniques of reading the mind of the enemy" (敵人読心の術) and "the aiki of battle cries" (掛け声の合気) are explained with "being ahead" (先んずる) as a presupposition, but specifics are not noted.

It has not currently clearly been communicated what kind of meaning "aiki" has in Daito-ryu Jujutsu. The reviver of this ryu, Takeda Sokaku, left no writings on that subject, in accordance with the secretive practices of Japanese bujutsu. However, one of his top students, Sawaga Nenokichi, often wrote in some 1913 notes, "apply aiki" (合気をかける) [Here Professor Goldsbury draws attention to Shishida's use of kanji - JAR], so we know that the word aiki and instruction thereof was in Daito-ryu Jujutsu before the name change to Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. This non-specificity of the word "aiki" led to the vagueness of the interpretation of "aiki" used by Ueshiba, a Kyouju Dairi of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu.

However, as Ueshiba-ryu spread, and as Ueshiba's students and successors sought to compensate for this vagueness, interpretations such as this came about: as "aiki" is made up of the characters for "ai" and "ki", it is interpreted as "a way of joining with the energy (ki) of heaven and earth", or alternatively, a "unity of the heavenly and the human" through the matching of rhythm of movement, or natural movement born of an experiential state of understanding.
----------------------

* kisetsu 気節 is one of those words that lends itself better to explanation than pithy translation. It is a compound of "ki", in this case meaning "feeling, intention", and "setsu", which carries a sense of both "time/rhythm" and "joint/break". In this context, it refers to the ebb and flow of intention and timing between attack and defense. 気節が合う, then, is talking about both opponents engaging in attack, or both opponents engaging in defense, or matched in permutations thereof, creating a stalemate.

** This meaning of "aiki" matches with the one reference to 合気 I've found in all of Yagyu Shinkage-ryu, indeed, in a document dating to the early 1800s. There it refers to a state of stalemate created by both opponents embodying 攻防一致, a unity of attack and defense.

Quote:

The question then becomes, why did Sagawa's father write aiki in katakana and not kanji?

Generally, when one wanted to keep things secret in historical budo writings, one did not write in kana, but used ateji; different kanji that would be read with the proper pronunciation by those in the know, but would make little sense to those who had not received the proper oral instructions. (I could list several examples of this in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu, but then I'd have to kill you.) The most likely reasons for writing in kana would be 1) emphasis, 2) to make clear the pronunciation of an unusual term, or 3) to utilize the existence of homonyms by not pinning down the word to any particular kanji, which carry some semantic meaning. And example of this can be seen in Yagyu Munenori's Heiho Kadensho, where he writes the word "utsusu" in kana, so that it can mean both "move" and "reflect", without being restricted by the meanings inherent in the kanji normally used to make that distinction.

Just as personal speculation, in this case I expect it's mostly 1) with a dash of 2).

Edit: Actually, I just thought of another common reason for writing in kana, one that is probably most likely in this case. If these are Sagawa Nenokichi's personal notes, and given that Takeda was not keen on writing much down, it's possible that Nenokichi simply wasn't sure what kanji were best used for "aiki" 相気 or 合気, and so merely wrote the word in kana as an expedient.

Last edited by Josh Reyer : 01-05-2011 at 11:52 PM.

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer

Thanks Josh
The Concept of Aiki is like a fine "mystery," only in that everything was revealed.
There is no division between the concept of "aiki".in the various examples you cited
a) the Edo period martial arts texts where, "aiki" (相気) is used to refer to the difficult state of engaging in attack and defense when in the same kisetsu* as the opponent.
b) The use of "aiki" (合気) found in many martial arts writings of the 1800s, with the same meaning as in the Touka Mondou. ( you could have included Tesshu's Muto ryu and Yagyu Shingan ryu here)
c) The meaning in the 1892 "Budo Hiketsu Aiki no Jutsu" (The Secret Budo Techniques of Aiki); here "aiki" is an inner teaching of budo, with the meaning of "being one step ahead of the enemy" (敵より一歩先んずる). Here, "techniques of reading the mind of the enemy" (敵人読心の術) and "the aiki of battle cries" (掛け声の合気) are explained with "being ahead" (先んずる) as a presupposition, but specifics are not noted.
d) Sawaga Nenokichi, note to "apply aiki here." often wrote in some 1913 notes, "apply aiki" (合気をかける)

There is also no division when you look at Ueshiba.-although I believe you have the order confused. You stated:However, as Ueshiba-ryu spread, and as Ueshiba's students and successors sought to compensate for this vagueness, interpretations such as this came about: as "aiki" is made up of the characters for "ai" and "ki", it is interpreted as "a way of joining with the energy (ki) of heaven and earth", or alternatively, a "unity of the heavenly and the human" through the matching of rhythm of movement, or natural movement born of an experiential state of understanding.
It wasn't the students to stated it was "the unity of heaven/ earth/ man" That was Ueshiba. And it is perfectly in line with Aiki in yo ho of Daito ryu.
It was the students who misinterpreted that as a rhythm of movement...etc.

The concept of aiki is one of joining the energy in oneself; gravity (heaven) and up energy (earth) and learning to control and manipulate that through in the center through intent (man), then and only then, when one is in full control of himself can one join with and control the energy of another. This creates sometimes really weird and profound controls of another on the physical level as it feels like you can read people and change what they themselves were trying to do to you and they are left feeling you are in control in spite of their best efforts. This makes a case for the many things written from the physical to the mental, and for the confusion of cause and effect from observers and students alike.
I would make a case that the physical effects are concrete and work across the board. The mental aspects and their effect on an opponent are real albeit it is interesting to note that the mental effects are far more pronounced on people used to the physical effects (students). The documented physical effects of real aiki when joined with decades of intense martial practice made it "feel like" the guy was reading your mind...and that when joined with the unusual physical effects made it seem otherworldly.
The mental effects can be likened to reading moves reading intent of others. That skill needs to be seen for what it is, as other great fighters with no aiki development also exhibited it. It is a natural occurence as your mind relaxes when you get used to fighting and stress.
For those with both skills it was an incredible daunting experience...hence the overstating by some writers.

In any event, You suggest that the non-specificity of the word "aiki" ...led to the vagueness of the interpretation of "aiki" used by Ueshiba. I contend his vagueness was intentional. This becomes evident or was revealed upon examining Ueshiba's peers in Daito ryu. It is clear that aiki was indeed capable of being transmitted. It was made equally clear that it was intentionally withheld by decree from all but a few. Sagawa went on record that the "key" was to train with body in tanren and ....that Takeda told him never to reveal it and to never teach Gaijin.
Then again we also now know that Tokimune tried to teach the tanren and he stated to another Shihan who was complaining that his contemporaries in the Takumakai didn't want them, they wanted waza, that "None of my guys wanted to do them either."

Speaking of weird Japanese expressions in Daito ryu....We have some interesting discussions of a weird phrase Oshikiuchi..."indoor"..."inside the threshold." attached to what Takeda said he learned from Tanamo as aiki!

Funny,, here we are in the 21st century and recently a Shihan in a koryu went on record that the inner teaching of his were now going to be "reserved for the Japanese."
Then we have some 20th centruy discussions of the Chinese arts where internal power was openly "held back."
Cheers
Dan

There is also no division when you look at Ueshiba.-although I believe you have the order confused. You stated:
<snip>
In any event, You suggest that the non-specificity of the word "aiki"

Just to be clear, I didn't state anything (except the explanation of "kisetsu" and the reference to Yagyu Shinkage-ryu). Everything above the dashes is a translation of Professor Goldsbury's quote of Shishida Fumiaki.

I will state, in as much as Yagyu Shinkage-ryu goes, that the definition of aiki as "kisetsu ga au" is an overall tactical/strategic concept, unrelated to body skills. The particular reference in YSR is to "departing from aiki", and refers to part of a kata where the swordtips aren't even touching, or barely touching. I tried to make this distinction clear in my translation and explanation, but I can see how it could still be confusing. Indeed, IMO the basic sense of this definition of "aiki" probably led to its later use in a more hands-on/weapons-on sense.

Quote:

Funny,, here we are in the 21st century and recently a Shihan in a koryu went on record that the inner teaching of his were now going to be "reserved for the Japanese."

Who was this?

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer

Just to be clear, I didn't state anything (except the explanation of "kisetsu" and the reference to Yagyu Shinkage-ryu). Everything above the dashes is a translation of Professor Goldsbury's quote of Shishida Fumiaki.

Thanks. Of course the observation still applies.

Quote:

I will state, in as much as Yagyu Shinkage-ryu goes, that the definition of aiki as "kisetsu ga au" is an overall tactical/strategic concept, unrelated to body skills. The particular reference in YSR is to "departing from aiki", and refers to part of a kata where the swordtips aren't even touching, or barely touching. I tried to make this distinction clear in my translation and explanation, but I can see how it could still be confusing. Indeed, IMO the basic sense of this definition of "aiki" probably led to its later use in a more hands-on/weapons-on sense.

Well I got that. I see it as directly relevant. I was suggesting that it may not have ever been a deviation or departure ..from...aiki...until later. I question whether the source came from a deeper understanding that has been lost as I can see direct relevance...to aiki.
Is it a deviation?
Is it a lack of understanding?
Says who?
One only needs to get out about with Menkyo and Shihan alike to understand just how very dicey that rank and supposed expertise can really be.

In what circumstance is the observable effect actually a result of the body skill being manifest, and not of some external strategy or both?
Where and when does it happen where It leaves most people to try to understand observable and recorded results of training in kata, without the tools to make them happen without cooperation.
Where and when can we see that over time, both the teaching and the doing degrade to the point that the very thing that was so enticing in the first place...is now a mere shadow of what it once was. And the modern adepts are left to wonder a) was it ever truly profound b) how to replicate it in anything but a cooperative venue,
All of which leaves us to wonder where we can find observable manifistations of these things done on a truly high level today.

Not Dan, but I would say he meant what he said. Ground pushes you up (solidity you bring up through you), Heaven (gravity) is a force pulling down on you. How you reconcile the two with your intent via a conditioned body is at least partly what's being talked about in the aiki space as a trained skill beyond timing and tactics.

Well I got that. I see it as directly relevant. I was suggesting that it may not have ever been a deviation or departure ..from...aiki...until later. I question whether the source came from a deeper understanding that has been lost as I can see direct relevance...to aiki.

Okay, then you're going to have to explain this to me. Here's the situation: Shidachi is in a strong chudan stance; no suki. Uchidachi is a in a strong chudan stance; no suki. The situation is a stalemate. This is "aiki", as in "kisetsu ga au". Per the kata, shidachi drops his strong chudan stance, to invite uchidachi's attack, or any kind of response, and create a suki. This is called "departing from aiki". Breaking the stalemate. This is the use of the term "aiki" in YSR, and the use that Mr. Shishida is talking about.

I'm not saying the body skills now popularly known as aiki did not exist in these old arts. I think they did and do exist; I believe they are in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu. However, I don't believe the use of the term "aiki" above refers to them. I have to side with Mr. Shishida in the idea that the term was used differently at that time, and different terms were used to refer to the body skills. But I am honestly open to persuasion. If you can explain to me how the above situation is directly related to the body structure and skills used in aiki arts, I'll happily revisit my position.

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer

Thanks, Budd. I'll wait for Dan to clarify. In the Chinese MA paradigm I'm familiar with, sinking (or yin) energy, heaviness, is associated with earth, and rising (or yang) energy, lightness, is associated with heaven; cf. in-yo in Japanese. Dan is welcome to use the terms as he sees fit; I just wanted his clarification as to how he intended to use them.

Okay, then you're going to have to explain this to me. Here's the situation: Shidachi is in a strong chudan stance; no suki. Uchidachi is a in a strong chudan stance; no suki. The situation is a stalemate. This is "aiki", as in "kisetsu ga au". Per the kata, shidachi drops his strong chudan stance, to invite uchidachi's attack, or any kind of response, and create a suki. This is called "departing from aiki". Breaking the stalemate. This is the use of the term "aiki" in YSR, and the use that Mr. Shishida is talking about.

I'm not saying the body skills now popularly known as aiki did not exist in these old arts. I think they did and do exist; I believe they are in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu. However, I don't believe the use of the term "aiki" above refers to them. I have to side with Mr. Shishida in the idea that the term was used differently at that time, and different terms were used to refer to the body skills. But I am honestly open to persuasion. If you can explain to me how the above situation is directly related to the body structure and skills used in aiki arts, I'll happily revisit my position.

Hi Josh
I was not discussing "the breaking of aiki" anywhere. I was quoting or more directly discussing the use of Aiki and what might have created it in the series of examples you offered and with ones I added..
The example you just outlined above I did not discuss.
To discuss that-one can (not necessarily always) break a connection, but depending on what that opponent was doing or intending to do just prior ...then retreating or adopting a different position can be leading/causing/creating an initiative from the opponent, thus maintaining a connection throughout. Two people connecting does not make aiki, it's just two people facing off...anyone can do that. One may have aiki both may not, one may lead and cause one to follow...both can just be ner do wells with weapons in their hands..
Leading the mind in offense/ defense is another aspect of aiki. I am just a bit jaded as to how well that all works outside of a closed system with students. There are aspects I think work in dialogue, de-escalation of violence or anger, on to actual fighting, but I think it is less dramatic than some of the ..er....stuff we typically see in the arts.

Thanks, Budd. I'll wait for Dan to clarify. In the Chinese MA paradigm I'm familiar with, sinking (or yin) energy, heaviness, is associated with earth, and rising (or yang) energy, lightness, is associated with heaven; cf. in-yo in Japanese. Dan is welcome to use the terms as he sees fit; I just wanted his clarification as to how he intended to use them.

Hi Tom,

I don't intend to speak for Dan, but I can speak on this based on my training with him. In our training, we look at all up energy coming from the ground (earth) and all down energy coming from gravity, which could be viewed as coming down form heaven.

I guess it all depends on how you look at the energy - do you look at the direction it is going or the direction where it is coming from - both are correct depending on your perspective

I don't intend to speak for Dan, but I can speak on this based on my training with him. In our training, we look at all up energy coming from the ground (earth) and all down energy coming from gravity, which could be viewed as coming down form heaven.

I guess it all depends on how you look at the energy - do you look at the direction it is going or the direction where it is coming from - both are correct depending on your perspective

Greg

Thanks, Greg. That makes complete sense. And it looks like Dan agrees with you (and Budd).

Beyond the up and down (earth and heaven) directions of the energy is the change and balancing in your own body . . . which is where the really cool investigation begins.